DVDActive uses cookies to remember your actions, such as your answer in the poll. Cookies are
also used by third-parties for statistics, social media and advertising. By using this website, it is
assumed that you agree to this.

Blu-ray vs. HD DVD: The Anti-Fanboy View

Chris Gould tries to take an unbiased look at the new high-definition formats

As a new convert to the world of high-definition I thought it might be a good idea to write a short article detailing my experiences so far. Thankfully I’ve been lucky enough to upgrade to a ‘Full HD’ set-up, which has allowed me to appreciate the improved audio-visual experience offered by both Blu-ray and HD DVD while remaining format-neutral. Let’s begin by examining the pros and cons of each format, as observed by me in the course of everyday use.

In the interests of fair play (and to minimise the inevitable accusations of bias) let’s start alphabetically, with Blu-ray Disc. I’ve been very impressed with the quality of the titles I’ve seen on Sony’s format, especially from relatively recent films such as Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. The level of detail in films encoded at 1080p far surpasses that of standard-definition DVD, allowing you to pick out elements that would ordinarily pass you by. Audio is also impressive, with engaging soundtracks encoded in lossless formats like PCM or DTS-HD Master Audio. However, it’s not all rosy in the Blu-ray garden.

One of the biggest selling points of the new formats is their ability to handle high-def audio. For Blu-ray this means either PCM, DTS-HD Master Audio or, less commonly, Dolby TrueHD. While all of these sound great on paper, things are a little more complicated than the specs suggest. At the time of writing I don’t know of a single Blu-ray player that can internally decode DTS-HD (either ‘lossless’ Master Audio or the lossy High Resolution variant). Instead people will hear the legacy Core track, which should still sound great, but which isn’t high-def audio. Thankfully a large number of discs include uncompressed PCM soundtracks, which are identical to the studio master but eat up disc space that could be used for other things.

The audio issues are annoying, but my biggest criticism of the format is that it is not standardised. My BD player is what they call a ‘Profile 1.0’ machine, which means it is capable of playing back Blu-ray movies and standard features but it is incapable of handling the more advanced features that will be available on future releases. For this you will need a Profile 1.1 player, which will allow you to enjoy picture-in-picture commentaries and other advanced BD-J (Blu-ray Java) features. Another problem with Profile 1.0 machines is that the already long loading times of Blu-ray are exacerbated when players encounter discs with even the most basic of BD-J content.

For example, the average loading time for a film on my machine is around thirty seconds, but throw some BD-J features into the mix (discs such as Pirates of the Caribbean and FF2: Rise of the Silver Surfer) and the loading times rise to anywhere between two and three minutes! I don't know about you, but I find this situation totally unacceptable and can’t believe that the technology was launched with what amounts to built-in obsolescence. I’m not even going to discuss Profile 2.0, which has already been announced...

Another major issue I have with Blu-ray is the regional coding. Although simplified to three regions (from DVD’s six), it is unlikely to be cracked in the way that DVD regional protection was. I wouldn’t have such a big problem with regional coding if it was used to protect the theatrical release dates of new releases (after all, that’s what it’s supposed to be for), but many studios still insist on coding catalogue titles. I’m talking about twenty year old films here (sometimes older). The only reason for the coding of such titles can be to control the price in various markets, but it also means that some territories have access to a much wider selection of titles than others. I like to watch Asian cinema, but this could become very difficult for me in the future, at least on Blu-ray.

Other than that, I’m fairly happy with the format. There are some minor issues that I find bothersome, such as navigation speed and the lack of resume support when you press the stop button, but these problems are not exclusive to Blu-ray.

As we move on to HD DVD many of the positive points raised above still stand, but there are a whole new set of negatives. The most widely publicised of these is probably the disc capacity issue. Whereas Blu-ray has a dual-layer disc capacity of 50GB, HD DVD is currently restricted to 30GB. This means less room for content, be it the main feature or bonus material, which is usually presented in standard definition. More space may come in the future with triple-layer discs, but whether these will be compatible with existing hardware remains to be seen and the Blu-ray camp is already promising 200GB discs...

One of the most obvious side-effects of the relative lack of disc space is that many HD DVD titles lack lossless soundtracks (and I don’t know of any with uncompressed PCM). However, I’ve recently read a number of articles and listened to a number of podcasts that suggest the lack of TrueHD is not necessarily down to storage limitations, but rather conscious choice by the content designers. Indeed, in a recent interview a pair of Dolby engineers discussed the lack of TrueHD on the flagship Transformers HD DVD, proclaiming the Dolby Digital Plus track to be ‘audibly transparent’ to the studio master. Are they to be believed? Thankfully the interactive side of things is pretty much sorted, as HD DVD was launched with support for interactive features from the get-go.

HD DVD also has less studio support than Blu-ray, which translates to a smaller selection of available titles. At present only two of the major studios are exclusively supporting HD DVD (Paramount and Universal), with Warner opting to cover both formats. This is in stark contrast to Blu-ray, which has exclusive backing from Sony (of course), Fox, Disney (and its subsidiaries) and Lionsgate. Of course many smaller studios are also backing the formats, but it would seem that Blu-ray also has the edge there (at least in my experience).

Other, less obvious ‘deficiencies’ include a slightly less robust manufacturing process, which makes HD DVD discs more susceptible to dirt and scratches than Blu-ray discs, and a lower maximum bitrate for DVD video. Whether these are particularly big problems is debatable, but they are worth mentioning all the same. Other than that my experience was much the same as Blu-ray, with only slight annoyances like the lack of resume support and extended loading times and navigational delays (although HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray in these respects).

Conclusion

At the moment both formats have compatibility issues, which usually manifest as the inability to play newer titles, but these can be addressed with firmware updates. Unfortunately it is impossible to get around the hardware restrictions of Profile 1.0 players, so all early-adopters will have to buy a new player if they want to enjoy the full Blu-ray experience. This is a particularly bitter pill to swallow considering the relatively high cost of Blu-ray hardware, and the main driving force behind my next statement.

If studio allegiances were not an issue and I was forced to choose between the formats at this moment in time, I would probably side with HD DVD. In my experience the hardware is more mature, the software offers more in the way of interactivity and, crucially, it does not enforce regional coding. As production costs fall storage will be less of an issue, either because of multi-layered discs or because we will start to see more multi-disc sets (as is the norm with DVD), which will close the gap even further.

Of course my opinion counts for very little in a battle that will be fought and won in the USA, a territory largely unconcerned with multi-region capability because of the size and diversity of the domestic market. With backing from so many of the major players, superior software sales and a larger installed user base courtesy of the PS3, the odds would seem to be stacked in Blu-ray’s favour. Certainly, given a level playing field Sony's format would seem to be the logical choice on paper, but I wouldn’t write off HD DVD just yet. I happen to think the formats are set to coexist for some time, for better or worse.

However, I personally feel that both formats are premature. The vast majority of people are simply not concerned about high-definition, be it Blu-ray, HD DVD or broadcast television. I know only a handful of people who can afford to own an HDTV and of those even fewer have them hooked up to a high-definition source. In fact, most people I've spoken to outside of the 'DVD community' don't have the first clue about either format, which is a trend that's repeated by store-workers and, yes, even the manufacturers if the conversations I've had with various technical help-desks are any indicator (they know who they are).

Sales would seem to reflect my opinion, with combined Blu-ray and HD DVD figures currently accounting for less than two percent of the total DVD market! At least some of the blame for the lacklustre sales figures must be attributed to the ongoing format war, which isn't helped by the two camps taking every opportunity to hurl insults or massage sales figures to 'prove' that the other is about to fail. Fanboys from both sides banging on about attach rates and the like seem to have forgotten what the formats are meant for—watching films. When it comes to that, Blu-ray and HD DVD offer a virtually identical experience; albeit one that is streets ahead of standard-definition in terms of quality. My advice to you is to hold off for a while longer until hardware is standardised and prices start to fall. If nothing else it will give you more time to save your pennies for that all-singing, all-dancing, dual-format player!

Advertisements

Comments

Reply

Message

Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.

Chris Gould wrote: People do research their options, but the PS3 doesn't offer any kind of high-def audio out apart from HDMI, which requires a new amp in most circumstances. It's swings and roundabouts really. I wouldn't call it infinitely upgradable either; it's clearly finite. The PS3 is now 2.0 BD-LIVE!http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Hardware...

Only if your collection consists of titles of he same region of he player, which is a big step back for those of us who have taken multi-region for granted for years

BD does seem to be more attractive in the US, what with the freebies. It's clearly the market Sony are targeting with a view to 'winning' the format war. Unfortunately that doesn't help the rest of the world, where the markets are smaller and the available selection of titles isn't as wide.

Still, it's all about the films, and of the four high-def titles I got for Christmas three were HD DVD and one BD, because it just so happens that I like a lot of Universal's films. I got my five free HD DVD titles as well, and we have watched about three of them in the last week, but haven't watched a single film on BD.

I went HD-DVD for a few simple reasons (really one main one): Price - I picked up an HD-A3 for $199 with 10 free movies (2 in the box, any 3 at the store, 5 free by mail). That deal basically made the player pay for itself.

So far I have been very impressed with the quality, though it does have some issues. Nothing too great, and like I said, the price was ridiculous. If Blu-Ray offered something like this, I would be on board for that as well. That's the main issue I have with BR - price! The cheapest player is still over $300, which is too much for me right now.

You and Chris kinda hit this idea around for a bit, but some things should be set straight.

I just bought two Samsung BD-P1400's (I had to get one for myself if my dad was going to get one from me ). I got the players for $279 a piece. Along with them, via samsung's website (you can also get them in-store at some locations), I'm getting 7 free movies. Because they realize I (the customer) have to wait for the 7 free movies in the mail, they're giving out an 8th for free (Planet Earth) for going through the rebate hassle. Like you said, Samsungs don't come with an hdmi cable -- however Monster (yes I know they're costly) is giving away 1 blu-ray disc with the purchase of a 4 foot hdmi.

When it's all said and done, I have a total of 2 players (one for my dad), and 18 free bd's coming. Obviously, I realize that 2 of them will be the same (Planet Earth), and 2 of them result from having to buy hdmi cables. However, including a free blu-ray disc with the cables makes the purchase very worthwhile.

Adding up the retail prices of my free media, the total comes to ~$650. Both players paid for themselves.

I'm thinking about buying the hd dvd player for my xbox for more free movies, if they have a similar offer. I'm not a fanboy, I just like movies.

I just wanted everyone to be aware - at least in the US, you can get some pretty cool perks from blu-ray as well. Oh, and some are seriously mistaken -- BOTH HD DVD AND BLU *WILL* PLAY YOUR CURRENT DVD COLLECTION.

Interesting - maybe we then need to do a hardware article on receivers and their ability to handle the new Audio codecs....

I spose all we need to do is wait another 6 months or so and when players are around $100 each then buy one of each. If BD is going to have 3 regions, then players will soon be cheap enough to buy one from each region - hey I know it is overkill but if you are a fan and need your fix from another region then... - most players come with a multi-tapped power transformer that can hndle most power supply systems in many countries. Of course eventually someon will get around the region issue and it will baloon from there.

Also, we must note that more than likely, when either format adds an extra layer or 2 to their discs, it will require a player change as the laser will not be able to focus on the new layers. Unless of course they "future proof it" (which I doubt)...

People do research their options, but the PS3 doesn't offer any kind of high-def audio out apart from HDMI, which requires a new amp in most circumstances. It's swings and roundabouts really. I wouldn't call it infinitely upgradable either; it's clearly finite.

Chris Gould wrote: It has been rumoured for a couple of month and was announced in the AVForums earlier. Will be interesting to see how it performs once the titles are available. Not much use to me or anyone else with a standalone though... People need to research their buying options. I knew the PS3 would be infinitely upgradable and that's a major reason I bought it.

It has been rumoured for a couple of month and was announced in the AVForums earlier. Will be interesting to see how it performs once the titles are available. Not much use to me or anyone else with a standalone though...

Wrymouth wrote: PS3 uses 1st generation BD player, it will be out of date sooner then later once new BD players are released. besides, PS3 has been out a year and it still has no games. The PS3 is now profile 1.1!http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Sony/Fir...

Wrymouth wrote: Some of you are missing the few minor points, Steven Spielberg is a director/producer nothing else. Him having a pref of BD means as much as Michael Bay pref of BD also, oh wait Transformers are HD exclusive... The big shots make a call whats movies are going to what format, not the people that make them (sadly).

Unfortunately, I don't think you actually read the Paramount/Dreamworks announcement when they went HD-DVD only.

Nicely hidden away at the bottom of the press release was one little line. "Today's announcement does not include films directed by Steven Spielberg as his films are not exclusive to either format."

Fettastic wrote: Chris I also have the HD DVD of 300. Although it includes the only interactive game ever on an HD DVD (Blu-ray has many of them), I found it pretty underwhelming. Also being a combo, it glitched at the layer change as Josh Zyber also experienced and notes in his article at www.highdefdigest.com.

It's not a combo disc here (or anywhere else in Europe I imagine) and it offers more over the BD than the interactive game (a blue-screen video commentary for example). As for the game, at least it loads in a respectable time, unlike any of the games I've played on BD. That's the issue with the current players that I've been talking about.

Fettastic wrote: And what exactly do I need to get over? That people who write articles in a position of authority get some things wrong?

Just when I thought you'd mellowed out you go and write something like that. I've given an opinion. Opinions can't be 'wrong'. Facts can, but I've been more accurate in that respect than you or any of the people giving me a hard time.

Wrymouth wrote: Some of you are missing the few minor points, Steven Spielberg is a director/producer nothing else. Him having a pref of BD means as much as Michael Bay pref of BD also, oh wait Transformers are HD exclusive... The big shots make a call whats movies are going to what format, not the people that make them (sadly).

On the PS3 note; PS3 uses 1st generation BD player, it will be out of date sooner then later once new BD players are released. besides, PS3 has been out a year and it still has no games.

It's not about how advanced the tech is, its how you show it off and what you give to people.

For real tho, all you ppl writing that 2001 space Odyssey is BD exclusive, YAWN,look at the big picture, BD is getting OLD useless movies that did not use todays special effects, total waste of a BD disk, those should have stayed on VHS. When it comes to the point only movies made since past few years should count, not old ass movies that did not make a difference.

PS. Chris Gould this is one of the best posts/views I read so far about this so called 'HD Wars'. Plus I really hope Disney sticks with BD, movies like Enchanted should never cross over to HD DVD.

Some of you are missing the few minor points, Steven Spielberg is a director/producer nothing else. Him having a pref of BD means as much as Michael Bay pref of BD also, oh wait Transformers are HD exclusive... The big shots make a call whats movies are going to what format, not the people that make them (sadly).

On the PS3 note; PS3 uses 1st generation BD player, it will be out of date sooner then later once new BD players are released. besides, PS3 has been out a year and it still has no games.

It's not about how advanced the tech is, its how you show it off and what you give to people.

For real tho, all you ppl writing that 2001 space Odyssey is BD exclusive, YAWN,look at the big picture, BD is getting OLD useless movies that did not use todays special effects, total waste of a BD disk, those should have stayed on VHS. When it comes to the point only movies made since past few years should count, not old ass movies that did not make a difference.

PS. Chris Gould this is one of the best posts/views I read so far about this so called 'HD Wars'. Plus I really hope Disney sticks with BD, movies like Enchanted should never cross over to HD DVD.

Well spank my bottom and call me Esther. A web enabled BD? You know these games are going to be about as useful/pointless as a pair of open toed wellies when they eventually arrive. See, I'll even have a pop at the HD format that I've invested in. It's quite a sensation.

Quote: If that's truly the case then you must not hate HD DVD as much as you're leading on...

So... As I was saying... Calm down and get over it! I've been leading on that I hate HD DVD? How did I do that? I've said that Blu-ray has many advantages to HD DVD and HD DVD certainly is not superior to Blu-ray, but how does that equate to hating it?

And what exactly do I need to get over? That people who write articles in a position of authority get some things wrong? How is that mine to get over? Or maybe you're suggesting I just put on a blissful smile and stop participating in forums? If that's your motto, then I guess you should follow it and "get over" me.

macnorton wrote: movieguy85 wrote: macnorton wrote: It's a shame for guys like me who have yet to buy a player. It seems like no matter which you choose, there will be an issue. And buy both, a decent option, might cost more $$$ in the end if one format dies out.

I am curious to know, has anyone reviewed (or bought) a HD-DVD/Blu-Ray combo player? It seems like that might solve the dilemma of choosing.

Why buy a combo player when you can get a $399 PS3 and a $199 HD DVD player? You'll come out cheaper than spending $800+ for the dual player.

Is that what the price point is...yeeesh! Although that is an interesting alternative that was suggested, I have no interest in a PS3 (or for that matter an Xbox 360). I don't have time for games anymore, and I feel if I am buying either system I want to be able to use everything it has to offer. If I am not going to play any games, then what is the point? Again that is my opinion. Looks like it is DVD's for me for a while.

Actually the Samsung BD-P1400 Blu-ray player is around $270.00 now.

Also Saw Iv has been announced as yet another web-enabled Blu-ray title. The Jason Statom Jet Li title War will also have a game built in people can play each other online, something never even suggested possible with HD DVD.

Chris I also have the HD DVD of 300. Although it includes the only interactive game ever on an HD DVD (Blu-ray has many of them), I found it pretty underwhelming. Also being a combo, it glitched at the layer change as Josh Zyber also experienced and notes in his article at www.highdefdigest.com.

The picture in picture is really cool, but the glitching is irritating.

movieguy85 wrote: macnorton wrote: It's a shame for guys like me who have yet to buy a player. It seems like no matter which you choose, there will be an issue. And buy both, a decent option, might cost more $$$ in the end if one format dies out.

I am curious to know, has anyone reviewed (or bought) a HD-DVD/Blu-Ray combo player? It seems like that might solve the dilemma of choosing.

Why buy a combo player when you can get a $399 PS3 and a $199 HD DVD player? You'll come out cheaper than spending $800+ for the dual player.

Is that what the price point is...yeeesh! Although that is an interesting alternative that was suggested, I have no interest in a PS3 (or for that matter an Xbox 360). I don't have time for games anymore, and I feel if I am buying either system I want to be able to use everything it has to offer. If I am not going to play any games, then what is the point? Again that is my opinion. Looks like it is DVD's for me for a while.

macnorton wrote: It's a shame for guys like me who have yet to buy a player. It seems like no matter which you choose, there will be an issue. And buy both, a decent option, might cost more $$$ in the end if one format dies out.

I am curious to know, has anyone reviewed (or bought) a HD-DVD/Blu-Ray combo player? It seems like that might solve the dilemma of choosing.

Why buy a combo player when you can get a $399 PS3 and a $199 HD DVD player? You'll come out cheaper than spending $800+ for the dual player.

It's a shame for guys like me who have yet to buy a player. It seems like no matter which you choose, there will be an issue. And buy both, a decent option, might cost more $$$ in the end if one format dies out.

I am curious to know, has anyone reviewed (or bought) a HD-DVD/Blu-Ray combo player? It seems like that might solve the dilemma of choosing.

Aye, at the end of the day it's about the films, not the formats. Both formats offer experiences that are all-but identical and it's just a pity that you have to own both to watch the films you love.

My argument has never been the technical superiority of HD DVD, but the poor implementation of BD's 'on-paper' specs. If both were complete, final standards, BD would undoubtedly be the format with more potential, but as things stand it's not living up to that potential. Just for the record, I currently have about twice as many BDs as HD DVDs. It has nothing to do with format preference, it's because some of the films I enjoy are only available on BD. When it comes to dual-format titles, I obviously buy the superior version (300 HD DVD for example).

Even if Chris was touting HDDVD, so what? From the years reading this site and Chris's reviews, I personally would trust him to be fair to both formats despite any personal preferences he may or may not have.

I'm PS3 BD but if I had the money for an HD Player I'd probably get one as well. It seems that some people just can't cope with others owning one format without requiring them to kick the teeth in of the other that they don't own.

For me, I don't have an endless supply of money so it's my hope that BD is still around in a few years so that I haven't pissed away a few hundred quid.

Fettastic wrote: Fettastic: As far as regional coding, it is optional for content creators. Sony, for example, often does not inlcude regional encoding. I have the UK version of Hellboy for example and it plays fine on my American BD player.

Chris Gould: A lot of Sony UK's titles are multi-region, but most of the other distributors are coding. It's also the same story in the US.

movieguy85 wrote: Get off it man. So you're pro-Blu Ray... whoopty s**t. But until you've spent as much time with HD DVD AND Blu-Ray, quit downing the format based on specs and things you've "heard" rather than experienced. Flush some of that Blu Kool-Aid out of your system and relax a bit. Are you talking to me? I have a PS3 and an HD-A1. i have about 150 titles for each format.

....You were saying?

If that's truly the case then you must not hate HD DVD as much as you're leading on...

I haven't taken anything personally. It just seems as though you are touting HD DVD over Blu-ray despite the fact that technologically it is far behind and losing in sales worldwide.

As an example, last night I went to my friends house to check out some Heroes extras. She had been complaining to me about her HD-A2 being problematic. I sort of assumed she wasn't being patient with the lengthy load times. I said, "See, just press open once. Yes it takes a long time but eventually it will open." It did. I put in the Heroes disc, it closed....then immediately opened again! She said "See? Sometimes it even does that in the middle of a movie!" not cool man. As a matter of fact, I took over the German release of Running Scared to watch with her and it refused to play the english track no matter what I tried. Again, a problem.

Things like that really turn people off.

But I learned that optical downmixes everything, something I didn't know before, so thank you. I'm not attacking you, just some things you have said. IHopefully everyone can come away from debate like things having learned something.

Thank f**k for that. Inflammatory? Talk about over-sensitive. I never tried to prevent anyone from having an opinion (if you actually read the thread you'll see that), I simply gave mine in return to one of your posts. It wasn't nasty, I wasn't telling you that you can't have an opinion, I just don't agree with you. It was you who rode in on 'Fettastic's' coat tails to have a pop at me with that 'shot me down' comment. You must have very low self-esteem if something like that upsets you. It's not my fault you didn't realise that I was the one who wrote the article either. Banging on about me 'ragging' PS3 owners and calling me biased - did you even read the original piece?

The Ranger wrote: I wonder with all the free disc they are giving away if that is some kind of indication that players aren't selling so well. If that is the case, I am not surprised. I have actually been dissapointed in that there seems to be more features, which I am a hound for, on dvd than either hd format. For that alone I stick with dvd. I am also not that big a fan of the blue or red top, though that is really minor. I can understand the difference in picture quality without a doubt, just not something that I find worth spending all the extra cash on to get a new tv, player and discs. Absolutely fantastic article though chris, I admire your guts to go ahead with it knowing the reactions you would get. I say, keep it up.

Cheers. To be honest it's only been two people who have taken it personally, which is a lot less than I expected. I was expecting to get some grief for the HD DVD criticisms as well, especially because I said that I think BD will eventually win out.

I think the free disc thing is interesting. Toshiba giving away so many titles could be seen as a last-ditch attempt to push HD DVD hardware, but it makes sense. Flog a load of players this Christmas by cutting costs and bundling titles and you have a larger installed user base in the new year.

With BD I don't know if it's a case of thinking they've already won, or if it's because the manufacturers are more diverse. Toshiba are basically the only HD DVD players you see in the UK and obviously they have a stake in the format, but over here the only BD players that seem to offer bundled titles come from Sony. Sharp and Samsung don't offer anything for some reason (I didn't even get an HDMI cable with the Samsung).

Still, I reckon if I was buying in the next year, maybe with 4th generation hardware, I might have given BD the nudge. Most of the problems outlined above will be addressed with 1.1, and that was the major factor that influenced my HD DVD comments. Well that and regional coding, which I don't know if I can ever live with.

Chris - I'm surprised that a moderator here hasn't warned you for trolling. There's no need to use such inflammatory language. I was just trying to put across my experiences of owning both formats. I'm surprised you haven't been cautioned for your manner but then I realise that YOU are the man in charge here.

I own both the PS3 and 360 HD player, my PS3 has significantly faster loading times compared to the HD player. The only Blu movie that has taken considerable time to load (worthy of a mention) is Spider-Man 3. It takes about 15 second to load, and you get this little spider hourglass that fills up letting you know how much time is left.

I own blu 300, and asked my friend to bring over his HD 300 (he is a super Xbox fanboy) and I have to give 300 on HD a nod in the picture category. On my 42inch Bravia, it looked amazing, thats not to say 300 Blu looked like c**p, the HD 300 had an extra sparkle.

Sound just seems clearer and more powerful on Blu in every instance, although Casino and King Kong sound amazing.

Anyone who says Indiana Jones is HD exclusive is either a fanboy or dumb. Speilburg movies are not included in any studio exclusive deal. I'm pretty sure Old Steve said he prefers Blu (can not provide article), as did Uncle George, coming from someone with Star Wars Tattoos, I can't wait to see Star Wars on any HD format, but would prefer Blu.

Taken as a whole, IMO I believe the best overall High def experience is either Pirates 3 or Spider-Man 3. The picture is truly incredible. Even if they are the weakest movies in their respective trilogies, they are incredible displays of picture and sound.

I wonder with all the free disc they are giving away if that is some kind of indication that players aren't selling so well. If that is the case, I am not surprised. I have actually been dissapointed in that there seems to be more features, which I am a hound for, on dvd than either hd format. For that alone I stick with dvd. I am also not that big a fan of the blue or red top, though that is really minor. I can understand the difference in picture quality without a doubt, just not something that I find worth spending all the extra cash on to get a new tv, player and discs. Absolutely fantastic article though chris, I admire your guts to go ahead with it knowing the reactions you would get. I say, keep it up.

It was very useful Chris thanks. Me thinks a long long way to go before theres ONE format and ONE machine that plays ALL the special features of a disc. The new Blade Runner HD disc is nudging me in the HD region but i must resist, it's early days yet and besides i can see a single 200GB disc with seamless branching of all the different versions in a year or two. Can't afford that Kuro Pioneer 42inch just yet anyway, boy what a T.V.

toonloon wrote: Oh come on Chris! You keep ragging on anyone who mentions they use a PS3 to view blu-ray AND you said that YOU didn't get any free blu-rays in your post. THAT'S what I'm talking about. Don't condemn me for mentioning there "different offer going on all the time" when you printed the opposite message in your post to put down blu-ray. I was just telling you THAT I DID get a free blu-ray with my player JUST to give everyone else reading this forum my experience of both formats which seems to fly against your own 'impartial' assessment which you defend so vociferously and, I'm disappointed to say, in such a knee jerk and defensive manner.

That's really how you read it? Are you this paranoid in everyday life? Where did I 'rag' on anyone? Seriously, point it out. If you'd like experience 'ragging' I can give a demonstration.

Oh Fettastic, you have given me a good laugh. Not only have you spectacularly failed to understand any of the points I made, you've resorted to quoting bits of my posts out of context and then 'backing them up' with 'statistics'. You're nothing more than a Blu-ray fanboy that can't handle someone criticising the format's weaknesses.

I could make another long post to address your reply, but there's really no point because you just don't want to listen. I will address one point, because it annoys me when people quote out of context. I wrote the following when discussing which lossless codecs each format uses:

Anyone with half a brain can see that I was comparing the use of the codecs on the respective formats, not their overall use. I'll try and write it in an uncomplicated manner, just for you.

TrueHD is mostly used on HD DVD; there are comparatively few discs with DTS-HD tracks. DTS-HD is mostly used on BD titles; there are fewer with TrueHD tracks. I never said for a second that they are the most popular kind of tracks on either format, because clearly they're not (Dolby Digital Plus is probably the most widely used on the discs I have).

This article offers my opinion of both formats' pros and cons after an equal period of use. At this moment in time I happen to think that HD DVD is the more complete format. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. I haven't slagged BD off; every point I raised is valid, as is every negative point I raised about HD DVD (but true to BD fanboy form you ignored those). I really don't see why you're taking it so personally though. You'd think BD was your wife and I'd just raped her.

I never understand why people spend so much time arguing about which format is 'better', even wishing failure on the other. Having two formats isn't ideal, but it is driving both hardware and software prices down.

Thank you to all of the level-headed people who saw this article for what it was though. Glad some of it was useful.

Fettastic: As far as regional coding, it is optional for content creators. Sony, for example, often does not inlcude regional encoding. I have the UK version of Hellboy for example and it plays fine on my American BD player.

Chris Gould: A lot of Sony UK's titles are multi-region, but most of the other distributors are coding. It's also the same story in the US.

movieguy85 wrote: Get off it man. So you're pro-Blu Ray... whoopty s**t. But until you've spent as much time with HD DVD AND Blu-Ray, quit downing the format based on specs and things you've "heard" rather than experienced. Flush some of that Blu Kool-Aid out of your system and relax a bit. Are you talking to me? I have a PS3 and an HD-A1. i have about 150 titles for each format.

Get off it man. So you're pro-Blu Ray... whoopty s**t. But until you've spent as much time with HD DVD AND Blu-Ray, quit downing the format based on specs and things you've "heard" rather than experienced. Flush some of that Blu Kool-Aid out of your system and relax a bit.

Old hardware like the most recent generation of player the HD-A3? Okay.

Quote: Confused? You most certainly are. The most recent generation over here includes the EP30 and EP35, which are called the A30 and A35 in the US. Both offer everything you mentioned and more. But hey, why post facts when you can just ignore them if it suits your needs?

Well over here the A30 came out BEFORE the HD-A3 did. Either way, they are BOTH 3rd generation machines, so it's not "old hardware" by any stretch of the imagination. Chris Gould wrote: Tell me what the maximum bitrate of DTS-HD HR is.

And you were telling me HD DVD is superior or even equal to Blu-ray? Now I understand why you didn't want to quote the bitrate.

Quote: Most HD DVD titles use TrueHD Nope, only about 30% have any HD audio at all. Blu-ray on the other hand has HD audio on about 80% of titles.Quote: whereas most BD titles use DTS-HD. See where I’m going with this? Granted a lot of BD titles use PCM, but equally many do not. Most BD titles actually use PCM, but as always, don't let facts get in the way.

And since you live in the UK, you already know that Blu-ray software outsells HD DVD software 4:1 there. Do you also realize Blu-ray software outsells HD DVD software 3:1 in the U.S. and 10:1 in Asia? Yeah, HD DVD is a real safe bet.

Ok, those HD audio stats were taken from a poster who did research on it, but now I've found a site that does it transparently.http://www.blu-raystats.com/

Blu-ray has 61.89% lossless audio

DTS HD 4.85% DTS HD MA 13.39%

Yeah, overwhelming majority there.

Let's check out PCM shall we?

PCM 42.73%

So yeah, overwhelmingly Blu-ray uses PCM audio which does not need decoding, although it does require either HDMI or multi analog. And yes, several Blu-ray players have multianalog out.

Oh come on Chris! You keep ragging on anyone who mentions they use a PS3 to view blu-ray AND you said that YOU didn't get any free blu-rays in your post. THAT'S what I'm talking about. Don't condemn me for mentioning there "different offer going on all the time" when you printed the opposite message in your post to put down blu-ray. I was just telling you THAT I DID get a free blu-ray with my player JUST to give everyone else reading this forum my experience of both formats which seems to fly against your own 'impartial' assessment which you defend so vociferously and, I'm disappointed to say, in such a knee jerk and defensive manner.

toonloon wrote: I know you don't like us saying this, but in the interest of balance, I got Casino Royal on blu-ray free with my PS3 and nothing free with my Toshiba HD-DVD player.

What are you talking about? Why would we have a problem with you posting that? Obviously there are different offers going on all the time, but at the moment HD DVD is giving the consumer way more. In the US it's a bit different because some players are being given away with multiple BD titles, or at the very least the Spider-Man trilogy.

Good review. As for the loading times on Blu-ray players, mine are the same as for DVD when playing Blu-ry discs on my VAIO VGN-FZ11Z or my PS3, and I can play Blu-ray Java content on both quite happily too. To be honest, I'm not totally committed to Blu-ray. I went with them as they had the larger studio support, but I would dearly love to see the likes of The Bourne Ultimatum and Transformers in HD, so perhaps one day I'll pick up an HD player too.

As said above, great article. Thanks and well done on it as now I am much more aware of the hindrances of either format and have some reasons (besides finances) to hold off for a decision on which to go for. It is astonishing that the discs can take so long to load.

You guys got a better deal than us. We got seven free films; two in the box five via mail-in redemption. You had a better selection as well. Still, I got some decent stuff. 300 is cool, also got Dreamgirls, Serenity, Hulk, The Prestige and Troy for the Mrs. Bourne Supremacy was also in the box, but it has lip-sync issues.

Tellingly, I got nothing with the BD player (which was also £60 more expensive).

I went HD-DVD for a few simple reasons (really one main one): Price - I picked up an HD-A3 for $199 with 10 free movies (2 in the box, any 3 at the store, 5 free by mail). That deal basically made the player pay for itself.

So far I have been very impressed with the quality, though it does have some issues. Nothing too great, and like I said, the price was ridiculous. If Blu-Ray offered something like this, I would be on board for that as well. That's the main issue I have with BR - price! The cheapest player is still over $300, which is too much for me right now.

Chaos Engine wrote: I'm a PS3 owner, therefore happily adjusting to Blu-Ray but really only for the technological convenience of it. The region code thing doesn't conform to all discs but it is still a pain in the ass & a further insult to consumers. I'm f**king disgusted at the studios for all this, especially now that I cant get Transformers on HD without buying a different f**king system altogether.

We should boycott the b*****d lot & stick to plain good old (not that f**king old) DVD.

Sorry...but once you've gone HD... you can't go back. It'd be like abandoning TV and going back to Radio.

I'm a PS3 owner, therefore happily adjusting to Blu-Ray but really only for the technological convenience of it. The region code thing doesn't conform to all discs but it is still a pain in the ass & a further insult to consumers. I'm f**king disgusted at the studios for all this, especially now that I cant get Transformers on HD without buying a different f**king system altogether.

We should boycott the b*****d lot & stick to plain good old (not that f**king old) DVD.

What is everyone's opinion of movies and extra content being downloaded rather than on a disk with packaging? I come from the old school and I personally like having a disk and packaging, especially when it is a set that has extras such as booklets, etc. The whole fun of movie watching is the collecting and showcasing of them. Having them being just a file on a hard drive, for me, takes the fun out of it.

Firstly, learn to use the quote tags, it will make your posts more coherent.

Fettastic wrote: "Amazing 24p True Cinema output and cinema-tuned picture presets allow you to see movies exactly as the director intended. Featuring LPCM, Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD audio decoding for ultra-realistic sound, this player is also a treat for the ears."http://www.amazon.com/Sony-BDP-S500-1080p-Blu-R...

I’ll investigate that, and if it does I’ll add the line ‘but the Sony BDP-S500 may do the job’ to help people out. However, a very quick look at an American AV forum suggest that it can only send DTS-HD over bitstream, not decode it internally (at least that's what the owners are saying). That could have been before a firmware update though.

Quote: You said Blu-ray was slower than HD DVD. That is simply not true and you have no basis to make that claim.

Do you have a reading problem? I am basing the statement on personal experience? What better basis is there? The article is about my experience using both formats. Jesus.

Quote: Old hardware like the most recent generation of player the HD-A3? Okay.

Confused? You most certainly are. The most recent generation over here includes the EP30 and EP35, which are called the A30 and A35 in the US. Both offer everything you mentioned and more. But hey, why post facts when you can just ignore them if it suits your needs?

Chris Gould wrote: Tell me what the maximum bitrate of DTS-HD HR is.

Quote: 1.5mbps

Try again.

Chris Gould wrote: Now tell me what the maximum bitrate that can be sent over legacy optical/coax.

Quote: 1.5mbps

At least you got that right. It is a problem because it is mandatory for all HD DVD players to decode TrueHD internally, thus offering full bandwidth audio to everyone. Because DTS-HD support isn’t mandatory on BD most players can’t do it, which means no full bandwidth audio from DTS-HD tracks. Most HD DVD titles use TrueHD, whereas most BD titles use DTS-HD. See where I’m going with this? Granted a lot of BD titles use PCM, but equally many do not.

Quote: Heck, the XBOX add-on can't output any HD audio at all, even if you have the HDMI elite model. If you want to talk about audio restrictions, compare apples to apples and include the add-on which is many times inferior to the PS3.

You said it yourself, it’s an add-on. The PS3 was built with BD in mind, the 360 wasn’t. It’s a games console first and an HD DVD player second. The only reason the PS3 is so good at the price is because Sony sell it at a loss and recoups their losses on the games. Standalone manufacturers can’t do that. Anyway, you’re the one that keeps bringing up consoles, not me.

Quote: This makes it sound as though blu-ray movies will no longer work in 1.0 players. the fact is that all Blu-ray movies will work in all 1.0 profile players from now until the end of time. the only difference is that p.i.p. and internet downloading won't work. since most people are only interested in the movies anyway, I doubt this is as big a problem as some are making it out to be.

No it doesn’t, it makes it sound as though people will have to buy a new player to enjoy all of the features on 1.1/2.0 discs, which is true. It’s funny how the BD fanboys (of which you are clearly one) always go on about how PiP and interactive features are not important when their machines can’t handle them. Wait until 1.1 is the norm, I bet they’ll be using them as another means to attack HD DVD.

Quote: And of course you fail to mention that it is unlikely that 51GB discs will work in any HD DVD player currently on the market which seems like a far bigger deal to me.

I’ll ignore the fact that Toshiba are saying they most likely will be compatible... Taken from my article: ‘More space may come in the future with triple-layer discs, but whether these will be compatible with existing hardware remains to be seen…’ So, you were saying something about failing to do what?

Come back when you know what you're talking about and can make a persuasive case citing credible sources, instead of just reeling off some things you think you know. DTS-HD HR max bitrate 1.5Mbps? DTS has other ideas.

Quote: Seems pretty clear that you don't think a single Blu-ray player can decode lossy DTS, which is completely absurd since they ALL can.

What I actually said was that I don't know of one, ot that none exist. As far as I am aware you still only get Core from DTS-HD HR on the vast majority of players. If that's wrong, please point me to the relevant information and I'm amend the article.[/quote] "Amazing 24p True Cinema output and cinema-tuned picture presets allow you to see movies exactly as the director intended. Featuring LPCM, Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD audio decoding for ultra-realistic sound, this player is also a treat for the ears."http://www.amazon.com/Sony-BDP-S500-1080p-Blu-R...

Quote: You said in your article that HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray. That is not true and in fact it's quite teh opposite. The fact that a couple java intensive discs, which has nothing to do with the mechanical operations the players themselves, is a totally different situation than the millenium long wait all HD DVD owners have to go through just to get the thing to turn on and open the disc tray.

I'm basing my opinions on the hardware that is available now, not what has come before or some intangible players that might come in the future. Based on my experiences with two standalone decks HD DVD is marginally more responsive in most (but not all) areas. You're quite right that BD's slow loading of BD-J titles has nothing to do with the mechanics of the players. I don't remember saying it did.[/quote] You said Blu-ray was slower than HD DVD. That is simply not true and you have no basis to make that claim.

Quote: Neither do the HD-A2 or the HD-A3, the most popular models of HD DVD player! Heck they don't even offer 1080p/24 playback which is what the discs are encoded in! The reason that's a big deal is because displays are forced to deinterlace the image and some of them don't do a very good job, leading to artifacts.

Again, you're talking about old hardware. Even your beloved PS3 needed a firmware upgrade to enable 24Hz support and up-conversion.[/quote] Old hardware like the most recent generation of player the HD-A3? Okay.

Quote: You can hear DD+ and DTS HD over the included optical connection on the PS3 though, another place you are wrong. If you're talking about DTS HD MA, then you have to make that distinction.

Quote: Tell me what the maximum bitrate of DTS-HD HR is. 1.5mbpsQuote: Now tell me what the maximum bitrate that can be sent over legacy optical/coax. 1.5mbpsQuote: Can't do it? Go to DTS, read up on it. You can get Core (i.e. reduced bitrate audio) over those legacy connections. They don't have the bandwidth to do anything like the bitrates supported by DTS-HD HR or MA. The same goes for DD+. What you're talking about is downmixing, which is completely different. I think it's you who needs to work on your distinctions. I looked into it a bit more and from what I can tell, for whatever reason despite SPDIF being capable of the DTS HD HR feed, it does resolve with some downsampling. But it should be noted that the same occurs on ALL SPDIF, not just Blu-ray. so those without a receiver having sperate analog inputs are SOL no matter what, and since several HD DVD players including the XBOX add-on ALSO do not have multi analog out, I fail to see how this is a Blu-ray only problem. Heck, the XBOX add-on can't output any HD audio at all, even if you have the HDMI elite model. If you want to talk about audio restrictions, compare apples to apples and include the add-on which is many times inferior to the PS3.

Quote: Also the idea that the lack of a secondary video processor being the reason POTC is slow to boot up on some players is ridiculous. POTC doesn't have a secondary video!

Wait for profile 1.1 and see how much faster these discs are. It's to do with persistent storage and all of the stuff that will come with 1.1. I'll admit that mentioning the secondary video/audio stuff wasn't clever; I should have made it clear I was talking about the full benefits of 1.1, which includes that and more. The video and audio processing does make a difference for features that are overlayed on the main feature though, such as the games on the FF: RotSS disc.

Quote: No conspiracy, no spec problem with blu-ray, just like you couldn't watch King Kong on any HD DVD player without upgrading to 2.0 firmware.

Quote: Your point? My BD player didn't work with four or five titles until the second firmware upgrade. You didn't have to buy a new player with HD DVD either, did you? People with 1.0 machines will, then they'll have to get another one when 2.0 is rolled out. Yeah, the specs were really standardised/finalised from the start...

This makes it sound as though blu-ray movies will no longer work in 1.0 players. the fact is that all Blu-ray movies will work in all 1.0 profile players from now until the end of time. the only difference is that p.i.p. and internet downloading won't work. since most people are only interested in the movies anyway, I doubt this is as big a problem as some are making it out to be.

And of course you fail to mention that it is unlikely that 51GB discs will work in any HD DVD player currently on the market which seems like a far bigger deal to me.

I am not going to upgrade to either format. When I put a movie in I don't want to have to wait minutes for it to start up. I definitely don't want to download patches in order for some movies/features to work.

The quality may not be as good, but I will stick with DVD until all the hassle is worked out. However, majority of folks seem to feel the download movie system will be in place way before the kinks are worked out of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, so it would appear to be a moot issue and waste of money and time by both companies producing these two new formats.

I'll try and address some of what you've said (although your quoting needs some tidying up), but this is quickly turning into the sort of fanboy thread I didn't want.

Quote: Seems pretty clear that you don't think a single Blu-ray player can decode lossy DTS, which is completely absurd since they ALL can.

What I actually said was that I don't know of one, ot that none exist. As far as I am aware you still only get Core from DTS-HD HR on the vast majority of players. If that's wrong, please point me to the relevant information and I'm amend the article.

Quote: There is no proof anywhere that one of the most powerful computer chips in the world can't manage to decode a soundtrack.

By that rationale there is no proof that it can. I'm repeating information I've read quite recently in various AV forums. That info could be wrong, but just because you want it to be true, it doesn't mean it is.

Quote: I was just clarifying that just because it's Blu-ray doe sn't mean it's region locked. But unlike HD DVD, there are very few Blu-ray titles that are not or soon will be available in the US so region encoding doesn't really matter.

The world does exist outside of the USA you know. This is a UK website and I live in England. It is a big issue for me because most titles come out earlier and are cheaper in the US and Asia.

Quote: You said in your article that HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray. That is not true and in fact it's quite teh opposite. The fact that a couple java intensive discs, which has nothing to do with the mechanical operations the players themselves, is a totally different situation than the millenium long wait all HD DVD owners have to go through just to get the thing to turn on and open the disc tray.

I'm basing my opinions on the hardware that is available now, not what has come before or some intangible players that might come in the future. Based on my experiences with two standalone decks HD DVD is marginally more responsive in most (but not all) areas. You're quite right that BD's slow loading of BD-J titles has nothing to do with the mechanics of the players. I don't remember saying it did.

Quote: Neither do the HD-A2 or the HD-A3, the most popular models of HD DVD player! Heck they don't even offer 1080p/24 playback which is what the discs are encoded in! The reason that's a big deal is because displays are forced to deinterlace the image and some of them don't do a very good job, leading to artifacts.

Again, you're talking about old hardware. Even your beloved PS3 needed a firmware upgrade to enable 24Hz support and up-conversion.

Quote: You can hear DD+ and DTS HD over the included optical connection on the PS3 though, another place you are wrong. If you're talking about DTS HD MA, then you have to make that distinction.

Tell me what the maximum bitrate of DTS-HD HR is. Now tell me what the maximum bitrate that can be sent over legacy optical/coax. Can't do it? Go to DTS, read up on it. You can get Core (i.e. reduced bitrate audio) over those legacy connections. They don't have the bandwidth to do anything like the bitrates supported by DTS-HD HR or MA. The same goes for DD+. What you're talking about is downmixing, which is completely different. I think it's you who needs to work on your distinctions.

Quote: Also the idea that the lack of a secondary video processor being the reason POTC is slow to boot up on some players is ridiculous. POTC doesn't have a secondary video!

Wait for profile 1.1 and see how much faster these discs are. It's to do with persistent storage and all of the stuff that will come with 1.1. I'll admit that mentioning the secondary video/audio stuff wasn't clever; I should have made it clear I was talking about the full benefits of 1.1, which includes that and more. The video and audio processing does make a difference for features that are overlayed on the main feature though, such as the games on the FF: RotSS disc.

Quote: No conspiracy, no spec problem with blu-ray, just like you couldn't watch King Kong on any HD DVD player without upgrading to 2.0 firmware.

Your point? My BD player didn't work with four or five titles until the second firmware upgrade. You didn't have to buy a new player with HD DVD either, did you? People with 1.0 machines will, then they'll have to get another one when 2.0 is rolled out. Yeah, the specs were really standardised/finalised from the start...

Quote: Blu-ray has had specs "from the get-go", it's just that they are being broached in tiers, far in excess of what HD DVD is capable of by the way. For example, internet downloading is highly touted as a reason why HD DVD is superior. Profile 2.0 will mandate 1GB of internal memory for downloads. HD DVD has a measly 128mb dedicated to storing internet downlodas, which isn't even enough to store everything you can download for Transformers alone!

First of all, I think what Chris means is that HD DVD mandated from the beginning to support PiP playback through HDI technology, to support internet connectivity through an Ethernet port, to have onboard storage, etc... These are things that were not mandated by Blu-Ray. Minus the PS3, how many Blu-Ray players have built-in ethernet ports? 1? 2? I just can't believe you're touting Blu-Ray has better specs *after* Profile 2.0. Lest we forget that it took them a year and a half to implement Profile 1.1.

As for the Toshiba's internal memory, what is really great about it is the fact that when you download content (such as on Transformers) it doesn't download the entire file, it downloads the pathway so the next time you put in the disc, you have the option to play that downloaded feature without having to download it again. Higher storage would have been nice, but it's simply not necessary as I have downloaded all the features on Transformers and it did not fill up my internal memory.

I have both a PS3 and the HD-A3 and it's true, the PS3 is an incredible machine. But what people forget is the reason why it's performs in the way of BD titles so greatly is because it's a gaming machine (with enough processing power to power a small city block.)

I agree with Chris that if you're going to compare formats and compare them on an apples-to-apples basis, then you have to take the PS3 out of the equation.

That being said, I also side with HD DVD (even though I own both) because Toshiba has delivered on which they have promised. Think about it, Sony has been developing Blu-Ray for 10 years, it should have been flawless out the gate... and it wasn't...

Fettastic wrote: [quote=Chris Gould wrote][quote=Fettastic wrote]Quote: The issue I have with the PS3 is its inability to offer multi-channel lossless audio over analogue connections, which forces people to buy a new amp to hear PCM, DD+, TrueHD and DTS-HD. Neither do the HD-A2 or the HD-A3, the most popular models of HD DVD player! Heck they don't even offer 1080p/24 playback which is what the discs are encoded in! The reason that's a big deal is because displays are forced to deinterlace the image and some of them don't do a very good job, leading to artifacts.

The A2 and A3's are the most popular because they are the most affordable. The A20, XA2, A30, and A35 all offer "FullHD 1080p" (which is a bulls**t claim to begin with as the difference between 1080i and 1080p are so insignifficant that you'd have to have a display device of at least 60" to even tell a difference, and those that do (like myself) have noticed no deinterlacing problems through my A3 on my 62" DLP. In fact, there's such a miniscule amount of deinterlacing problems 1080p fixes that it honestly really isn't worth mentioning.) playback.

Chris Gould wrote: Fettastic wrote: A couple of things. DTS HD is simply maximized legacy DTS. It has a ceiling of 1.5mbps. EVERY Blu-ray player can decode this.

No it's not. DTS-HD covers both the HR (High Resolution) and MA (Master Audio) variants. It says so on the DTS website.

This is what you said in your article:Quote: At the time of writing I don’t know of a single Blu-ray player that can internally decode DTS-HD (either ‘lossless’ Master Audio or the lossy High Resolution variant)." Seems pretty clear that you don't think a single Blu-ray player can decode lossy DTS, which is completely absurd since they ALL can.

Quote: The PS3 is heavily rumored to provide internal DTS HD MA decoding within the next couple of months via a firmware update.

Quote: I read that it doesn't have the necessary silicon to do so. There is no proof anywhere that one of the most powerful computer chips in the world can't manage to decode a soundtrack.

Quote: As far as regional coding, it is optional for content creators. Sony, for example, often does not inlcude regional encoding. I have the UK version of Hellboy for example and it plays fine on my American BD player.

Quote: A lot of Sony UK's titles are multi-region, but most of the other distributors are coding. It's also the same story in the US. I was just clarifying that just because it's Blu-ray doesn't mean it's region locked. But unlike HD DVD, there are very few Blu-ray titles that are not or soon will be available in the US so region encoding doesn't really matter. Yeah I paid $50 for Reign of Fire on HD DVD and if people want to do that they can, but the Blu-ray version which apeared a little later is far superior.

Quote: As for speed of navigation and disc access, that is restricted to the Samsung player. My PS3 can access every Blu-ray disc as fast as a DVD player accesses DVDs. It is HD DVD that is molassis slow with every disc. The notion that HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray is ridiculous. Anyone who has experience with both knows this.

Quote: Did you even read the article? I have experience of both and HD DVD is faster. It's not just the Samsung - I've seen YouTube footage of BD players taking 3 minutes to load PotC (and then failing). The reason it is slower is because most players don't have the secondary video/audio processors required for Profile 1.1. When 1.1 is common, it will be less of an issue. You keep bringing up the PS3 but it's not a standalone deck, which is what I'm talking about here.[quote] You said in your article that HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray. That is not true and in fact it's quite teh opposite. The fact that a couple java intensive discs, which has nothing to do with the mechanical operations the players themselves, is a totally different situation than the millenium long wait all HD DVD owners have to go through just to get the thing to turn on and open the disc tray.

[quote]I bought a first gen HD-A1 HD DVD player. It is not true that all interactive content was available from the "get-go". In fact it coulodn't even decode TrueHD when it came out. It wouldn't even play U-Control discs without a firmware update.

Quote: It's true that it was part of the specs 'from the get'go', which is not true with Blu-ray. All new formats have teething problems, but at least HD DVD was standardised. I wondered when the first true 'fanboy' would arrive - I expected it to be a pro-Blu-rayer.

Blu-ray has had specs "from the get-go", it's just that they are being broached in tiers, far in excess of what HD DVD is capable of by the way. For example, internet downloading is highly touted as a reason why HD DVD is superior. Profile 2.0 will mandate 1GB of internal memory for downloads. HD DVD has a measly 128mb dedicated to storing internet downlodas, which isn't even enough to store everything you can download for Transformers alone!

Quote: The issue I have with the PS3 is its inability to offer multi-channel lossless audio over analogue connections, which forces people to buy a new amp to hear PCM, DD+, TrueHD and DTS-HD. Neither do the HD-A2 or the HD-A3, the most popular models of HD DVD player! Heck they don't even offer 1080p/24 playback which is what the discs are encoded in! The reason that's a big deal is because displays are forced to deinterlace the image and some of them don't do a very good job, leading to artifacts.

You can hear DD+ and DTS HD over the included optical connection on the PS3 though, another place you are wrong. If you're talking about DTS HD MA, then you have to make that distinction.

I think it's pretty clear who the fanboy without the facts is.

Also the idea that the lack of a secondary video processor being the reason POTC is slow to boot up on some players is ridiculous. POTC doesn't have a secondary video!

No the reason for a couple of titles being slow to boot up is due to enhanced java on the disc which some players need a firmware upgrade in order to process correctly. That's it, that's all. No conspiracy, no spec problem with blu-ray, just like you couldn't watch King Kong on any HD DVD player without upgrading to 2.0 firmware.

Fettastic wrote: A couple of things. DTS HD is simply maximized legacy DTS. It has a ceiling of 1.5mbps. EVERY Blu-ray player can decode this.

No it's not. DTS-HD covers both the HR (High Resolution) and MA (Master Audio) variants. It says so on the DTS website.

Quote: The PS3 is heavily rumored to provide internal DTS HD MA decoding within the next couple of months via a firmware update.

I read that it doesn't have the necessary silicon to do so.

Quote: As far as regional coding, it is optional for content creators. Sony, for example, often does not inlcude regional encoding. I have the UK version of Hellboy for example and it plays fine on my American BD player.

A lot of Sony UK's titles are multi-region, but most of the other distributors are coding. It's also the same story in the US.

Quote: As for speed of navigation and disc access, that is restricted to the Smasung player. My PS3 can access every Blu-ray disc as fast as a DVD player accesses DVDs. It is HD DVD that is molassis slow with every disc. The notion that HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray is ridiculous. Anyone who has experience with both knows this.

Did you even read the article? I have experience of both and HD DVD is faster. It's not just the Samsung - I've seen YouTube footage of BD players taking 3 minutes to load PotC (and then failing). The reason it is slower is because most players don't have the secondary video/audio processors required for Profile 1.1. When 1.1 is common, it will be less of an issue. You keep bringing up the PS3 but it's not a standalone deck, which is what I'm talking about here.

Quote: I bought a first gen HD-A1 HD DVD player. It is not true that all interactive content was available from the "get-go". In fact it coulodn't even decode TrueHD when it came out. It wouldn't even play U-Control discs without a firmware update.

It's true that it was part of the specs 'from the get'go', which is not true with Blu-ray. All new formats have teething problems, but at least HD DVD was standardised. I wondered when the first true 'fanboy' would arrive - I expected it to be a pro-Blu-rayer.

toonloon wrote: EXACTLY! This was the point I was making when Chris shot me down.

I didn't shoot anybody down, I merely acknowledged what you said and then offered my own opinion. I know the PS3 is faster, but it's a games console not a standalone unit. The issue I have with the PS3 is its inability to offer multi-channel lossless audio over analogue connections, which forces people to buy a new amp to hear PCM, DD+, TrueHD and DTS-HD.

If you really want a blu-ray player, I couldn't reccomend a PS3 high enough. It's constantly being updated via wireless (or ethernet) firmware releases and the ease of use and picture quality is fantastic. I haven't had any region issues with any of my US blu-rays yet.

I have a WB exclusinve, Forbidden Planet on HD and I really disappointed with the picture quality. I'd heard great things about this restoration but it really disappoints me. There is some excellent special features on the HD30 single disc. I wonder if the extra content made them encode the film in a lower bitrate...?

The thing that gets me about all this, is that the formats are still bloody changing! How can they release these players and discs and then start to update the spec so that older equipment won't be able to access the new features. Triple layerd HD DVD and 200GB Blu-ray - are you kidding? (I know you are not btw) How can that be acceptable - as I can only assume movies will take advantage of these new discs and possibly render current players out of date. Shocking. As for the 3 minute-loading time.. someone should be shot for that.

If Warner goes blu-ray exclusive i think the format war is over. blu-ray wins! But i doubt this will happen anytime soon as there are many movies that are hd dvd exclusive from Warner such as the Matrix trilogy, Caddyshack etc. But this could be because it is easier to encode or something on hd dvd

This new rumor is old and is being said by a lionsgate executive, who is surprise, blu-ray exclusive!

I think hd dvd will gain some software sales in the next few months as the all the people that bought cheap hardware will be giving and getting them for christmas and then be buying software. Plus, they have started doing buy one get one free sales that blu-ray has been doing for a while now.

Matt Thompson wrote: Then why is it that films encoded at a 30GB capacity like Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, sound and look just as good as something like Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, encoded for and released exclusively on Blu-ray? In the case of Warner dual titles are based on the HD-DVD encode. I doubt the extra space could make the BD look much better though.

Blue-Kal-El wrote: At least I'm not alone with the Microsoft conspiracy... And yet over 90% of the world uses their software, including most Microsoft bashers, sigh!

Fettastic wrote: A couple of things. DTS HD is simply maximized legacy DTS. It has a ceiling of 1.5mbps. EVERY Blu-ray player can decode this. No it's NOT! The legacy core inside DTS-HD is 1.5Mbps but the bitrate of DTS-HD HR and MA is much, much higher.

Fettastic wrote: As far as regional coding, it is optional for content creators. Sony, for example, often does not inlcude regional encoding. I have the UK version of Hellboy for example and it plays fine on my American BD player. It's optional on DVD too but you reckon if HD-DVD disappears Sony will continue to not use Regional Coding?

Fettastic wrote: As for speed of navigation and disc access, that is restricted to the Smasung player. My PS3 can access every Blu-ray disc as fast as a DVD player accesses DVDs. It is HD DVD that is molassis slow with every disc. The notion that HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray is ridiculous. Anyone who has experience with both knows this.

EXACTLY! This was the point I was making when Chris shot me down. I'm actually lucky enough to own be able to play both formats and through my experience there is little to seperate the two at this point other than different coloured boxes, but if I really had to go for a format, it would be Blu-ray.

A couple of things. DTS HD is simply maximized legacy DTS. It has a ceiling of 1.5mbps. EVERY Blu-ray player can decode this.

There are a couple of Blu-Ray standalone players that can pass via bitstream DTS HD Master Audio. You will then need a receiver that can decode it.

The PS3 is heavily rumored to provide internal DTS HD MA decoding within the next couple of months via a firmware update.

As far as regional coding, it is optional for content creators. Sony, for example, often does not inlcude regional encoding. I have the UK version of Hellboy for example and it plays fine on my American BD player.

As for speed of navigation and disc access, that is restricted to the Smasung player. My PS3 can access every Blu-ray disc as fast as a DVD player accesses DVDs. It is HD DVD that is molassis slow with every disc. The notion that HD DVD is quicker than Blu-ray is ridiculous. Anyone who has experience with both knows this.

I bought a first gen HD-A1 HD DVD player. It is not true that all interactive content was available from the "get-go". In fact it coulodn't even decode TrueHD when it came out. It wouldn't even play U-Control discs without a firmware update.

I haven't purchased a hi-def player yet, but when this madness first started, I was going to go with HD-DVD based on the titles being presented (and the fact Blu-Ray was having some serious issues).

Now jump forward a bit and I would have to go with Blu-Ray. Although the hardware situation is a little disheartening (after I saw the price drops and was ready to pull the trigger), HD-DVD just doesn't have the capacity to keep up. I work in a technical field and I can tell you that when a copy is behind and comes up with something like "we now have 51GB's on a disc as opposed to Blu-Ray's 50GB"...it never ends well.

However that is not to say I am ready to hand my money over to Sony just yet. Granted there are some incredible looking Blu-Ray titles, unless they get some of the hardware stuff straight, I can wait a bit.

HagenDarth wrote: [quote=Bradavon wroteQuote: Well, word is that Warner is going to go Blu-Ray exclusive in 2008 which would almost mean the end of the format war.

Even if that happens it won't change much when Universal and Paramount still only support HD-DVD.

Oh, yes it will...and if & when they do Paramamount will probably find a way to wriggle themselves of the deal. And not that I'm taking a specific side in this stupid, useless, pathetic, greedy format war - which was instigated by Microsoft so that both sides lose/end in a stalemate & then they'll clean up with their movie download service. Sheesh! [/quote]

[quote=Bradavon wroteQuote: Well, word is that Warner is going to go Blu-Ray exclusive in 2008 which would almost mean the end of the format war.

Even if that happens it won't change much when Universal and Paramount still only support HD-DVD.[/quote]

Oh, yes it will...and if & when they do Paramamount will probably find a way to wriggle themselves of the deal. And not that I'm taking a specific side in this stupid, useless, pathetic, greedy format war - which was instigated by Microsoft so that both sides lose/end in a stalemate & then they'll clean up with their movie download service. Sheesh!

I couldn't care less which Hi-def format wins out, as long as ONE does, that is supported by EVERY studio...and so long as 'bribing' Microsoft's hope for mass 'downloads', which would probably end up 'extras-lite' in too many cases, doesn't win out too soon over a REAL medium to own and collect.

I went for HD DVD earlier this year and haven't looked back, 60+ discs and counting. I'm not buying a BD player just for Man On Fire and you can keep the Pirates movies, etc. If you're a Bruckheimer fan then Blu-Ray's your daddy.

Exactly. The extra disc space isn't an issue for the video side of things. A movie encoded with AVC/VC-1 will be the same size regardless of format. The difference is with audio options and the availability of extras.

Oh, and I believe Gabe was talking about DreamWorks, not Paramount, when referring to Spielberg.

Then why is it that films encoded at a 30GB capacity like Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, sound and look just as good as something like Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, encoded for and released exclusively on Blu-ray?

It looks like BD should win out, despite what anybody would say about Sony formats and refer to BetaMax, MiniDisc, or UMD. The sales numbers are speaking loudly to the studios, with BD ahead 2+:1, 3:1 over Black Friday weekend.

Warner going BD-exclusive is currently a rumor, with reps saying they're waiting to see sales figures for Q4 of this year.

Somebody mentioned that 300 looked virtually the same on BD and HD DVD - that's because they're using the same files which were encoded for HD DVD's smaller disc capacity. If Warner would encode for BD's 50GB capacity and then re-encode for HD DVD's 30GB capacity, a lot of people would see a huge difference in the picture quality. BD's extra space and bandwidth (about 10Mbps more than HD DVD) work in tandem to reduce the amount of compression applied to the video, hence producing a better quality picture.

I've stopped buying DVD's for sole fact that I want to wait and see what technology is coming next. I would like Blu-Ray to come out on top simply because of the higher capacity.

One thing that bothers me is that there are claims that if you buy the duel format player, you don't have to worry about who wins. Well, until you want to replace your player and, if Blu-Ray wins (for the sake of argument), you suddenly have dozens-to-hundreds of HD DVD's that won't work on Blu-Ray player and since Blu-Ray won the format war, they don't make duel format players anymore.

I do have a couple of questions maybe someone can clear up. I gather that Blu-Ray players will NOT play regular dvd's but HD DVD players will. Is that true?

Also...I can't remember my second question, so I guess I just have that one.

Gabe Powers wrote: Then why would his studio go HD DVD only? I'm not arguing or anything, I'm just wondering. Does Spielberg own Paramount? Seriously I didn't think he owned them.

Bouncy X wrote: i'm not sure porn will make that big a difference this time. i mean its availabe everywhere these days. its not like back in the VHS/BETA war....where porn was only in seedy theaters. now you can see it for free online and even on tv. Exactly. Neither do I.

Would anyone seriously pay HD Disc prices for Porn? Especially when it's free on the web. Does porn really matter if it's in SD or HD? As long as it's watchable I cannot see it being at all important if it's in HD.

Quote: Well, word is that Warner is going to go Blu-Ray exclusive in 2008 which would almost mean the end of the format war. Even if that happens it won't change much when Universal and Paramount still only support HD-DVD.

Wrymouth wrote: I got to admit this war sucks. True thing about this article is that the BR players are slow when it comes to the interactive menu's. My friend got a PS3 and went to his place and when we watched a few movies it lags a little when you select a movie option.

I'm more leaning towards HD-DVD movies are way cheaper and movie selection owns (IMO) Plus CLOVERFIELD, IRON MAN, INDIANA JONES, THE DARK KNIGHT, all going to HD DVD only it looks. Difference in picture quality is minimal when you see '300' on BR and HDDVD on 2 HD sets side by side.

I could have sworn, me and few other ppl at the store, the 300 movie on HD looked a lil better.

actauly indiana jones is made by steve speilberg he has the right to produce his movies on any format hence why 2001 space oddysy came out on blu ray only

Chris, I would like to say "thanks" for one of the more unbiased looks at the new formats. I have found that on other DVD sites, personal bias has caused a lot of one-sided negative news reporting/slanting. It was VERY nice to have someone obviously without an agenda detailing the pros and cons of the two formats. I have to agree with your final analysis that BOTH were premature and needed to have A LOT more beta testing done. Our customers at the company I work for would hang us out to dry if we released product in this fashion.

i'm not sure porn will make that big a difference this time. i mean its availabe everywhere these days. its not like back in the VHS/BETA war....where porn was only in seedy theaters. now you can see it for free online and even on tv. while i'm sure it might help boost sales a little, i just dont think it'll be the end all thing that it was to VHS.

and as someone else said, porn is fantasy, we dont wanna see every detail..like all their scars and stretchmarks....makeup is used for a reason..lol

Wrymouth wrote: Plus CLOVERFIELD, IRON MAN, INDIANA JONES, THE DARK KNIGHT, all going to HD DVD only it looks. Difference in picture quality is minimal when you see '300' on BR and HDDVD on 2 HD sets side by side. First off, Warner is currently format neutral and despite what Chris says I think Warner will undoubtedly make a choice by the beginning of 2008 whether or not to stay format neutral or pick a side. In any case The Dark Knight will NOT be HD-DVD exclusive unless Warner chooses to go that way.

And Steven Spielberg has said that he only wants his films released on Blu-Ray. The studios said they'd cross that bridge when they come to it, but I wouldn't hold my breath for an HD-DVD Indy -- push comes to shove I imagine the studio will just not release it in hi-def at all, like Star Wars and the original Indys.

Quote: For example, the average loading time for a film on my machine is around thirty seconds, but throw some BD-J features into the mix (discs such as Pirates of the Caribbean and FF2: Rise of the Silver Surfer) and the loading times rise to anywhere between two and three minutes! THREE minutes! My god I'm pleased my first BD Player will be Profile 1.1 compatible.

Quote: Indeed, in a recent interview a pair of Dolby engineers discussed the lack of TrueHD on the flagship Transformers HD DVD, proclaiming the Dolby Digital Plus track to be ‘audibly transparent’ to the studio master. Are they to be believed? In my opinion that's a complete cop out to not give the consumer the choice of which they prefer. The same applies for Warner's stance at not supporting DTS on DVDs.

Quote: Of course many smaller studios are also backing the formats, but it would seem that Blu-ray also has the edge there (at least in my experience). From my experience it's HD-DVD that has more of the smaller labels behind it not BD. There are loads of examples of European HD-DVD exclusives of American BD titles.

Quote: Of course my opinion counts for very little in a battle that will be fought and won in the USA, a territory largely unconcerned with multi-region capability because of the size and diversity of the domestic market. I do find it strange 8-10 years after DVD most North Americans to this day are scarred or cannot be bothered to try and imported DVD. The idea of importing an Asian Region A BD (which would work just fine) let alone a Region B or C BD simply will never cross most North Ameticans minds.

I would disagree the domestic American market is diverse though. There are just as many UK exclusives are there are American ones. To not miss out you have to go Multi-region.

Thankfully in the case of Blu-ray if you get a Region A Player you're "mostly" covered by BDs which are Region 0 and those that are Region A. There simply aren't that many important Region B companies.

I believe Entertainment in Video and Fox are it, the latter obviously releases on Region A anyway.

Quote: The fact that first gen blue-ray players are now obsolete and will not play features on new discs is outrageous and sony should be ashamed. These people payed upwards of $1,000 for a player and they cant upgrade to play picture-in-picture or hd audio like dts-hd MA. Thats a $1,000 paperweight. On the whole you're correct but you're exaggerating a bit. A Profile 1.0 Player will never be obsolete and certainly isn't a paper weight. Standard extras (which make up the bulk of extras and probably always will) will continue to work as will crucially the movie.

As to DTS-HD well that affects HD-DVD Players just as much in equal measure. Compatible Players just coming out now and lets not forget the DTS Core in DTS-HD is usually Full-rate 1.5Mbps DTS which still sounds amazing to me on DVDs.

Quote: If nothing else it will give you more time to save your pennies for that all-singing, all-dancing, dual-format player! LG call them the Multi-Blu Player (formerly Super Multi-Blu), Samsung the Duo HD Player whatever you call it Combo Players are the future!

I think the porn industry is going to have a lot to do with it. As far as I'm aware they are currently heading down the HD-DVD road, which may swing things in that format's favour. Same as the internet was driven in the early days by porn, we may see it happen again in the HD Format war.

$40 bucks for a movie?!, i just bought 4 hd dvds from amazon for $45. By one get one free, finally hd dvd is having these sales to catch up with blu-rays number skewing sales.

The fact that first gen blue-ray players are now obsolete and will not play features on new discs is outrageous and sony should be ashamed. These people payed upwards of $1,000 for a player and they cant upgrade to play picture-in-picture or hd audio like dts-hd MA. Thats a $1,000 paperweight.

As long as i can have Back to the Future, Jurassic Park, and Indiana Jones. Im happy and blu-ray ray wont get em! for now!

JimLee41 wrote: I don't understand this, one of the main attractions to this new technology is the storage capacity, but when I see look in retail stores such as bestbuy or Fye and see Mission Impossible 3 (2-disc set)on blu ray or a two disc set of the Transformers on HDDVD something just doesn't seem right, it just doesn't make sense. This was supposed to be one of the main selling points of this new technology, finally a technology that can have one film with the ultimate picture and sound with bonus features on 1 disc. I mean does it really matter if Blu ray might be upgrading to a 300gb disc in the future if there not even going to utilize it? It's pretty much wasted potential, anyway there is not format war, blu ray and HDDVD is not mainstream and probably will never be. No one is willing to shell out 38.99 or 40 buck for a damn movie, it's ridiculous I'll stick to my 5.1 DTS Surround sound system with my Criterion Collection and Im set for life...but an awesome review on the techhnology

well you gotta remember, there was a time when regular dvds cost over 30 dollars and sometimes 40. so prices will probably eventually lower to "dvd standards"

something that always bugs me in these "format war" conversations is the comments by some that they dont wanna lose their dvd collection or have to start over. i didnt think that was an issue at all, arent both blu-ray and HDDVD players backwards compatible?

im personally waiting to see if there's a winner but should there be someday...i wont start rebuying all my dvds on the winning format. i'll just start buying my movies from that point in whichever format is around.

this isnt like the switch from VHS to DVD, you dont and wont have to rebuy everything. i mean sure if you're some super duper tech person who NEEDS everything perfect and crystal clear maybe you will...but everyone else, if ur happy with ur dvds then keep em.

but yes a very nice article. im gonna get a PS3 soonish most likely so if blu-ray wins then i'm set. but i dont plan on buying any HD player or even the 360 add on. i dont deny how much better the picture is on HD/blu-ray but DVDs are more than good enough for me. i already have a 42 inch HDTV but no 5.1 speakers or anything, i just use the tv's speakers. and again, thats good enough for me. well ok, they have all that PLUS 5.1 upstairs so im sorta spoiled but thats besides the points..lol

I don't understand this, one of the main attractions to this new technology is the storage capacity, but when I see look in retail stores such as bestbuy or Fye and see Mission Impossible 3 (2-disc set)on blu ray or a two disc set of the Transformers on HDDVD something just doesn't seem right, it just doesn't make sense. This was supposed to be one of the main selling points of this new technology, finally a technology that can have one film with the ultimate picture and sound with bonus features on 1 disc. I mean does it really matter if Blu ray might be upgrading to a 300gb disc in the future if there not even going to utilize it? It's pretty much wasted potential, anyway there is not format war, blu ray and HDDVD is not mainstream and probably will never be. No one is willing to shell out 38.99 or 40 buck for a damn movie, it's ridiculous I'll stick to my 5.1 DTS Surround sound system with my Criterion Collection and Im set for life...but an awesome review on the techhnology

Excellent piece, specially because you stayed neutral and true to your thoughts.

It's difficult to say which (or even if) format will win, specially in its first year. Blu-ray has the edge over HD DVD, but like gaming consoles, both can coexist, specially by having different studios exclusively supporting one format (just like you can only have Halo on the XBOX).

As for me, I don't have an HDTV yet (the one we had broke and we haven't had a chance to fix it yet) and I don't yet see myself buying a 40+ LCD in the near future (maybe more than six months). I did buy an HD DVD player because of the $98 thing at Wal-Mart and recently bought Transformers just because it was on sale.

I have a theory on which there is a war so that neither wins and digital downloading wins, but they call me crazy...later on that.

I love movies, and for right now, I am going to stick with DVD, though I drool everytime I pass thru Cars and Ratatouille on Blu-ray. If they lower their prices to DVD standards (which in my opinion have gone up), the minority of us who are into this, will start buying, specially since nowadays the hi-def discs have more special features, which is what I think the minority of us like about DVDs of any kind.

Oh, yeah. Hate flippers. Hate those horrible cases where you try to get out the DVD and the DVD cracks, or those double disc Paramount cases. Hate things not being anamorphically enhanced. And I hate not having a DTS track on the movies that need it the most (hear me Pirates??)...

I also have both. I have the ps3 and the toshiba HDa2 player. it takes a bit longer for the toshiba to start up. once it gets going its good. the ps3 is also very fast. its faster then the stand alone players. my problem is that bluray has more titles that I want. like spidey trilogy, fifth element, the fly remake, die hard, etc. I have more bluray titles then HD DVD. the spidey trilogy was all regions. I have the region 4 of spidey 3. worked fine on my ps3. Jacob

Thanks for the review. I am currently upgrading to next gen. We got a HDTV on the way to our house soon. I plan on getting a PS3 later on this month and I already own a 360 so I might just buy the HD add on so I can haev both players incase the war ends in favor of one side.

I only own 2 High Def movies which would be The Prestige(Blu Ray) and Children Of Men(HD DVD Combo) Ive watched them each and I think the picture is great on both machines. I really like the fact that HD has the combo with DVD as most of my friends or family that watches my DVDs dont have any High Def systems. I do really wish HD could fit both movies on one side so we dont have the cheese "flip over" disc. I really enjoy disc art and I find when theres no art the disc looks really boring.

I understand that about the BD players and my PS3 but as I said at the beginning of my post, I was referring to a PS3 blu-ray player and a Toshiba HD-E1. I'm also well aware that PIP is not possible with earlier model BD players but as I stated in my post, it IS possible with PS3 because of the possibility to update the firmware.

I concede that you are correct when you refute my statement that blu-ray is more prolific. A quick search on dvd empire found that there are 443 on blu-ray and 404 on HD. But if you walk into HMV on Oxford Street you will see two racks of blu-ray and one of HD-DVD, same goes for Zaavi (Virgin).

You assumption that I don't buy from other territories is incorrect. MOST of my discs are from abroad. I have 7 UK releases on 5 of which are blue and 2 are red and 9 from the US with 5 blue and 4 red.

I'm glad you picked up on the insanity of having this format war prolonged. That was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Incidentially, I DO own 300 on HD-DVD because I was aware of lack of PIP in the blu-ray disc. I have the Shining on HD because I thought red looked better at the top of the artwork and 2001 on blu-ray for the same reason BECAUSE I BELIEVE THERE TO BE NO DIFFERENCE in presentation on my players other than the cover artwork. Again this was a point I was trying to make about the insanity of this supposedly consumer driven format.

I'm not going to get into a arguement about Shrek or anything else. I won't disagree on that matter because I know nothing about it. But I would be interested to hear why you think blu-ray is as bad as Microsoft and Toshiba's HD-DVD.

toonloon wrote: First of all, both players can have their firmware updated by the internet, so both can be up to date, including PIP for Blu-ray and improved loading times for the Toshiba.

That may be true of the PS3 (although it's unconfirmed at this moment in time), but it's definitely not true of the vast majority of standalone BD players.

Quote: There are many more discs available for blu-ray which is a major factor in which discs I buy because both formats look stunning and both players have upscalers via HDMI.

I don't think there are 'many more'. There are more, but it's not as many as the BD camp would have you believe. Of course it depends which markets you look at.

Quote: I haven't had a problem with region coding on either format so that hasn't been an issue.

HD DVD doesn't have regional coding for the HD DVD content, just for the SD content. If you haven't got a problem with regional coding I can only assume that you don't buy discs from other countries. If you do, you will have a problem in the future because BD codes both.

Quote: when offered a choice of both (not possible with some films) to buy by looking at the cover art and deciding if the red band at the top or the blue band at the top looks best.

That's, well, insane. So you might possibly buy the BD of 300 if you thought the blue cover looked better than the red of HD DVD, even though the HD DVD version is superior?

Quote: Paramount got huge 'promotional' funds from Microsoft and Toshiba to drop their support of blu-ray.

I believe the Paramount deal had something to do with the rights to use Shrek when marketing HD DVD. Anyone who thinks that studios have not been given incentives to side with BD is naive. Both camps are as bad as one-another.

I'm one of the rare and lucky people who own players that play both formats.

I have a PS3 and a Toshiba HD-E1 and I own several discs on each format.

Here are my views, take them or leave them.

First of all, both players can have their firmware updated by the internet, so both can be up to date, including PIP for Blu-ray and improved loading times for the Toshiba.

Both formats experience lag when navigating. The Toshiba takes about 30 seconds just to power up with the playstation taking less time but its a different machine for different purposes so I wont count that. Mind you, I have never experienced anything near the wait times for the PS3 blu-ray player that the article mentioned.

There are many more discs available for blu-ray which is a major factor in which discs I buy because both formats look stunning and both players have upscalers via HDMI.

I haven't had a problem with region coding on either format so that hasn't been an issue.

I think I can best sum up this ridiculous format war by saying that I choose which format when offered a choice of both (not possible with some films) to buy by looking at the cover art and deciding if the red band at the top or the blue band at the top looks best. On a more cynical note, I ordered the limited edition BLADERUNNER set on HD-DVD because I thought it might be worth more in the future because I feel that with Sony owning Bond and Fox owning Star Wars, HD-DVD will go the way of beta max.

And finally, for you all to feel sorry for me being a sad Trekkie or get angry at the conspiracies at work here intent on giving the consumer the hardest time - I only bought an HD-DVD player to get the new Star Trek set on HD because Paramount got huge 'promotional' funds from Microsoft and Toshiba to drop their support of blu-ray. If I absolutely had to pick a format to support above the other, I would go with blu-ray.

The fact also is that I watch my DVDs mainly on my PC, which is far too old to even run hi-res DivX smoothly, let alone HD material. And what about those "copyright" protection schemes for playback on PC? Sounds more like "Anti-viewing protection" to me.

Not to mention I don't see myself buying a 40+ inch television anytime soon. I don't even have a surround sound system yet.

John Oaks wrote: Well, word is that Warner is going to go Blu-Ray exclusive in 2008 which would almost mean the end of the format war.

That's just a rumour started by a Blu-ray bod that spread. I've already read an official statement from a Warner executive stating that they will be releasing on both formats for the foreseeable future. If the rumour was true you would expect silence or denial.

I got to admit this war sucks. True thing about this article is that the BR players are slow when it comes to the interactive menu's. My friend got a PS3 and went to his place and when we watched a few movies it lags a little when you select a movie option.

I'm more leaning towards HD-DVD movies are way cheaper and movie selection owns (IMO) Plus CLOVERFIELD, IRON MAN, INDIANA JONES, THE DARK KNIGHT, all going to HD DVD only it looks. Difference in picture quality is minimal when you see '300' on BR and HDDVD on 2 HD sets side by side.

I could have sworn, me and few other ppl at the store, the 300 movie on HD looked a lil better.

I am happy with DVD for now. heck, don't even own a HDTV. Once I do, I'll need the hi-def cable box (for digital cable or satellite), a HD surround system (with many HDMI ports) and an HDMI DVD player until someone wins this war. Once that happens, I'll have the hardware to fully enjoy and experience it. Of the two, I prefer blu ray from what I've seen so far

Anyway, my HD player hasn't arrived yet, but the region coding is a big issue for me, as a fan of foreign and exploitation cinema. My DVD collection is probably 30% non-R1 at this point, and I'd hate to lose the ability to watch a possible German release of Night of the Demon in HD.

That last bit was kind of a joke. Kind of.

Also, the load issue really pisses me off. My Sony model takes almost a minute just to turn on, and Ratattoullie took about three minutes just to load the God damned menu, plus another three to load the film.

I don't have the money to invest in either format and am waiting on the sidelines to see which format wins the war. I am silently praying that Blu-Ray wins for the simple fact that I hope to buy a PlayStation 3 this spring.